Review of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) by Suzi G — 08 Apr 2014

Be careful when you read that title, or else you'll probably end up with "The Chamber Potter of Secrets". Now that was just childish, although, in all fairness, we are talking about a film for kids... that has a runtime which flirts with the three-hour mark. After this installment, this series started to direct its own attention more towards the older kids with broader attention spans, and yet this is the "Harry Potter" film that runs the longest, which is really saying something, and is just plain ridiculous. Well, we can at least be thankful that the film is actually good, and we can most certainly be thankful that Kenneth Branagh is only acting here. I mean, seriously, "Hamlet" fans, if Branagh was directing, oh man, let me tell that this film would be... so very much better, but nonetheless longer. You know what, come to think of it, as much as I can joke all day about how the producers felt that this film was long enough without the creative input of the guy who had the guts to faithfully adapt "Hamlet" in all of its four-hour-long glory, in this film, they had a director of the magnitude of Kenneth Branagh, and yet, they still chose to bring in, not just any mediocre director, but Chris Columbus. Well, I don't reckon Columbus is that mediocre of a filmmaker, because, come on, he made two pretty good "Harry Potter" films in a row, even though he didn't get either "The Sorcerer's Stone" or "The Chamber Potter-I mean, "The Chamber of Secrets" to rewarding points all that easily.

While still relatively reasonably well-developed, this film still suffers from that classic "sequelitis" symptom of neglecting to firmly flesh out characters and narrative elements one might recognize from the predecessor in the context of a new plot, exploring certain areas only so extensively and distancing you a bit from colorful supporting roles that ought to be prominent in this pseudo-ensemble piece. Nevertheless, the film, despite its developmental shortcomings, stands as the longest of the "Harry Potter" installments, with a relatively whopping runtime of 160 minutes or so, and seeing as how exposition is unevenly handled in this narrative of only so much weight to justify a sprawling length, most of the bloating comes from excesses in filler, punctuated by repetitious meanderings in material, and not exactly organically. Where "The Philosopher's Stone" (Yeah, I prefer the non-American title; what of it?) was mostly about getting to know the magical world of Harry Potter, eventually flavored up by some conflict, there's plenty more going on here, in terms of plotting, yet the final product still takes time to bloat itself with all that pesky filler, resulting in often glaring focal inconsistencies that break plot coherency. At the very least, there are consistency issues to the tone of the film's overblown narrative, which is a little more reliant on consequential tension beyond the fluff, although still has a tendency to break such tension a touch too firmly with lighter moments and further shake your investment in a drama whose focal unevenness is disconcerting enough. Inconsistency plagues the tonal and pacing structure of the narrative something fierce, just as it plagued the predecessor, and just like the predecessor, this film's tone at least keeps consistent in a certain cheesiness, which is not nearly as aggravating as it was in the even fluffier "The Philosopher's Stone", but still kind of annoying for talking down to audiences, and for further thinning a sense of bite to this drama. Again, there's more conflict and consequence to this film, in addition to a little more inspiration in some places, thus, the final product exceeds the quality of a predecessor that was still able to secure a rewarding state, which continues to go challenged here by natural shortcomings, alone, whose conceptual limitations to momentum go further retarded by glaringly uneven pacing, focus and tone. The film is all but all over the place, but when it's all said and done, the fact of the matter is that the final product comes down to a rewarding point, achieved largely through highlights in substance, and with no small bit of help from highlights in style.

Whether it be because they're not a fresh as they were in "The Philosopher's Stone", or simply because they're not as inspired as they were in the predecessor in question, John Williams' efforts as score composer are a little less effective with this sequel, yet still carry enough whimsical sweep to sustain liveliness and compliment the tones and themes of this fantasy epic, much like Andrew Ackland-Snow's, Neil Lamont's, John King's, Peter Francis', Mark Bartholomew's, Steven Lawrence's and Lucinda Thomson's lavish and distinguished art direction, polished by excellent visual effects that also compliment some impressive action sequences which mark heights in liveliness establish in the technically proficient crafting of this film's setting. Musically and visually innovative for the time and still aesthetically sharp, this film is generally about as technically proficient as its predecessor, so much so that style breathes some life into substance, which receives even more support from some onscreen inspiration that stands above its counterpart in "The Philosopher's Stone". Granted, as an almost wholly fluffy affair, "The Philosopher's Stone" hardly gave anything for its cast to work with, so, being that there is still plenty of superficiality around the edges of this blockbuster, acting material is limited, but make no mistake, there's a little more tension, and the cast adapts pretty well, retaining their charm from "The Philosopher's Stone", while convincing enough dramatically to add to the final product's sense of weight. Leads Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe, with a little help from the underused Emma Watson, particularly step up their impressive game from the predecessor, and yet, it's mostly chemistry and charisma that gets these and other performances by, because there's still not that much depth to the heavier material in this more consequential second installment in a saga that continued to get edgier from here. With this installment, the series was too early in its dramatic game to have all that much meat, and yet, with that said, this is still a weightier follow-up to a film which was conceptually meaty enough to compel, so through all of the kiddy superficialities and other natural shortcomings is an intriguing, mystery-driven narrative which juggles much in the way of fluff and depth, done justice by a compelling interpretation. Steve Kloves returns for the first time as screenwriter, beginning his journey towards tighter and more tonally realized scripting, which was still too shaky to do away with glaring inconsistencies in pacing and focus, but nonetheless colorful, gracing the lighter aspects with clever humor and memorable set pieces, and bringing some life to the heavier elements through cleverly subtle plotting that reinforces the sense of mystery which drives this thriller narrative, whose sense of edge is further brought life by a more inspired directorial performance by Chris Columbus that offers even smoother pacing, steadies by more thoughtful moments that draw on genuine tension. While the pacing to Columbus' direction is certainly more realized, it's debatable if this film wields as much of the entertainment value that carried the predecessor to its rewarding point, but there is still plenty of fun to this flick, in addition to enough realized edge to more than make up for shortcomings and grip as a decidedly superior sequel and, by its own right, rewarding fantasy thriller for the whole family to be compelled by.

Once the magic has passed again, for now at least, some developmental shortcomings fail to be as disconcerting as inconsistencies to pacing, narrative focus and tone, and consistencies to some cheesiness, all behind a story concept of only so much consequence, that threaten the final product's reward value, firmly secured by the lively scoring, art direction and effects, charismatic performances and conceptual narrative intrigue, brought to life by admittedly sharp writing and direction, that make "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" a fun, tense and all around superior second breath in a classic saga.

3/5 - Good.